By Here is a just plain weird story for everyone today to read:
An Army specialist is in jail, accused of making threats against fellow soldiers, including in a vulgar, violent rap song that describes shooting those responsible for his stop-loss orders.
Spc. Marc Hall, an Iraq veteran based at Fort Stewart, Ga., has been in custody since early December. He’s been charged with “conduct prejudicial to the good order and discipline of the armed forces,” allegedly threatening violence on multiple occasions, according to Army charge sheets.
Hall is accused in various specifications of threatening to “go on a rampage,” attack other soldiers if he was deployed, and shoot the brigade and battalion commanders.
Another count accuses him of distributing “original songs wrongfully threatening acts of violence against members of his unit.” Hall reportedly mailed a copy of the song to the Pentagon after receiving his stop-loss orders over the summer. The song, posted on Hall’s personal Web site, does not name anyone specifically. [Stars & Stripes]
Read the rest at the link, but basically this guy came back from Iraq planned to ETS, but before his ETS date he gets hit with a stop loss to go back to Iraq. That sucks, but you know that when you sign the contract especially now a days with how much attention people getting a stop loss order has received.
So this idiot goes and writes a rap song threatening to kill senior leadership and even mails it to the Pentagon in the wake of the Ft. Hood rampage. Than this idiot has the audacity to claim freedom of speech. It should be no surprise to anyone that this guy is now a member of IVAW. At least Hall is a real Iraq veteran unlike the frauds at IVAW.
I thnk it is pretty clear the military will be better off without a dope like this guy after he gets done serving what ever time making such threats will cost him.
You can read more about this over at This Ain’t Hell.
3:57 am on January 8th, 2010 1
Regardless of his intent, songs are a form of speech that must be protected.
4:26 am on January 8th, 2010 2
Soldier does not have the freedom of speech to make threats against chain of command, regardless of intent.
4:37 am on January 8th, 2010 3
You can't fix stupid.
4:20 pm on January 8th, 2010 4
Every soldier gets frustrated with some aspect of their job. This is where you need some pals to take you out somewhere to drink a few beers and put things in perspective. We had an E8 explain this to us, one time. I'll never forget it.
7:43 pm on January 8th, 2010 5
Not in the military. I suspect it would be a waste of time to try and explain why if you are that out of touch.
7:52 pm on January 8th, 2010 6
The reality is that one crackpot going on a rampage doesn't justify cracking down on freedom of speech.
7:56 pm on January 8th, 2010 7
Is it a threat or a work of fiction?
8:36 pm on January 8th, 2010 8
Teadrinker does have a point. Where do you draw the line? What if he expressed his feelings in a 'fictional' short story, or if he did so in art or comics?
8:37 pm on January 8th, 2010 9
You're right.
But take everyone else's guns away, and that will take care of everything bad.
1:18 am on January 9th, 2010 10
You have no expectation of freedom of speech in the military. If he wants his freedom of speech he can get it back when he is a civilian.
4:16 am on January 9th, 2010 11
teadrinker, you never served so I understand your ignorance of the US military.
No freedom of speech in the military. I understood that when I joined. The Military that protects the country's freedom of speech, in effect has no freedom of speech as individuals, while serving.
Common knowledge.
Got nothing to do with (THAT TERRORIST)(RELIGIOUS EXTREMIST) at Fort Hood.
And teadrinker—he is not a "crackpot". He is a murderer. A Terrorist and a Religious Extremist. Only those who reject the facts will dismiss him as a crackpot.
4:21 am on January 9th, 2010 12
I guess it depends on what the meaning of "is" is.
Stay in Canada teadrinker.
4:23 am on January 9th, 2010 13
Sounds like an outstanding E8. Need more like him.
4:53 am on January 9th, 2010 14
teadrinker's only point is that he has zero understanding of what a U.S. Soldier is, and he displayed that ignorance. (I"m sure he is quite intelligent in other areas)
Doesn't matter how the (soldier) expressed it. While in the service, he just doesn't have the right to express anything that (may-might-could-possibly-conceivably) be (in any way-shape-or form) be taken as a threat toward anyone other than the enemy while under orders.
JoeC, to answer your question, "where do you draw the line?" You do not draw a line, there is no line. You follow orders and bitch to you buddies over a whiskey about how stupid things are. As if, as a soldier, you have enough of the facts to decide that.
Other than that, you have your chain of command. Real problem, take it up the chain. Squad Leader-Platoon Sergeant-First Sergeant-Commander. Commanders and First Sergeant all have "open door policies" as well.
That troop was simply being an ignorant a$$. I hope they burn him for his ignorance with a "less than honorable".
fubar
11:11 am on January 9th, 2010 15
As I said…
3:57 pm on January 10th, 2010 16
It depends on the intent and what exactly is said. Members of the Armed Forces do a form of protected free speech, but there are limits. Basically anything derogatory to your chain of command (not NCO support channel) or otherwise detrimental to the good order and discipline of the unit. Exactly what is and is not acceptable is up to the command, if he demands courts martial then it'll be up to the jury.
The general rule of thumb is to never use specific names, make threats or make public statements.
This soldier has the right to express his feelings in whichever manor he chooses, provided he does not encourage conduct that is prejudicial to the good order and discipline of the Armed Forces. If he felt strong enough about his stop-loss that he desired to make rap songs, he should of kept those songs private. He has the right to make music, he doesn't have the right to publicly criticize the Armed Forces or otherwise encourage dissent.
8:33 pm on January 10th, 2010 17
You can't communicate threats aimed at anyone- in or out of uniform. It's the "yelling FIRE in a crowded theatre" issue.